Perry has been holding the chairmanship until a new agency member is officially appointed; under the RTM ruling, he will continue to do so for the immediate future.

In proposing the postponement Monday, RTM Land Use Committee chairman Peter Berg, who helped engineer the strategy, praised Salisbury, seeing pushing back a vote as an alternative to outright rejecting his nomination.

"In effect, we turned the item down, but we were able to do it in a way that didn't reflect in any way on Mr. Salisbury," Berg said. "It was important that nobody made any statement in regards to Mr. Salisbury's qualifications."

Perry's departure has not been clean, with the motives behind it remaining unclear, even to his IWWA colleagues, who have unequivocally supported him keeping the chairmanship. Salisbury himself has stated his preference to remain an alternate agency member instead of Perry leaving.

"He has an incredible amount of experience and I've always been supportive of him," Salisbury said. "I wrote that in a joint letter with the agency to the selectmen. If the result [of the postponement] is that somehow there's a methodology to get Larry reappointed, then it's a good thing."

In April, the Board of Selectmen elected to not renominate Perry to his position of 14 years, with Selectmen Drew Marzullo and David Theis voting against him. Theis has explained his decision as a reaction to what he perceived as pre-judgment of the Cos Cob Reform Synagogue plan, based on Perry allegedly telling him, "just wait until that gets through." Marzullo said he had been under the impression that Perry was not interested in serving another term with the IWWA.

Rather than going after Salisbury, the Land Use Committee has instead used the postponement to question the validity of the selectmen's claims against Perry. Berg acknowledged that in interviews with the committee, both Marzullo and Theis had qualified their initial claims -- Theis had never explicitly asked Perry what he meant by the comment, and Marzullo had never verified with Perry his belief that Perry did not want the position.

"Their arguments seemed weak, especially when we found that they didn't ask any follow up questions," Berg said.

Theis has stuck by his original claims, saying that it was time to "pass the baton" to find new leadership.

"My decision is based in what was most appropriate for the public," he said, "which was not to reappoint someone who seemed to have a predetermined opinion on a case he hadn't even heard yet."

Marzullo could not be reached for comment Thursday.

First Selectman Peter Tesei had voted in favor of renominating Perry.

Perry, meanwhile, has suggested there may be greater machinations behind the decision to not renominate him, having previously pointed the finger at a group of Zaccheus Mead Lane residents.

The Zaccheus Mead Lane Association and the Indian Spring Land Company, which owns a large plot of forested land adjacent to the street, have been locked in battle in both town hall and state courts over the property.

Residents believe the ISLC is preparing to develop the land and attach it to Zaccheus Mead Lane's high-end housing market, but company representatives have denied the claims. In initial hearings over tree removal plans and the wetlands located on the company's property, Perry refused to let Zaccheus Mead Lane residents discuss the impact of the as-of-yet hypothetical subdivision, saying any development there was not germane to the application being discussed.

Perry claimed in a letter to Greenwich Time that one resident, Sidney Goodfriend, demanded he step down from his chairmanship and said he would "do all he could" to prevent Perry's renomination. In his own letter to the editor, Goodfriend denied he had "publicly lobbied" for Perry's removal, but acknowledged he had confronted the selectmen about their nomination decision.

Goodfriend declined to comment this week.

Both Theis and Marzullo have publicly stated they were not influenced by the Zaccheus Mead Lane debacle, but Berg nonetheless noted the issue in his committee report to the RTM.

The proposal passed Monday in a 101-to-66 vote, with nine members abstaining.

Perry said he was happy with the result.

"I believe the RTM reached the correct result for the benefit of the agency and of the town," he said. I'm sorry it played publicly and dysfunctionally, but I'm gratified and the rest of the board is pleased with the result."

The RTM cannot indefinitely postpone voting on an appointment; after four months without a vote, the nomination will be voided. By that time, the Board of Selectmen must nominate another applicant or have the nominating power handed to the RTM Appointments Committee.